On 9/20/21 11:03 AM, Stephen Colebourne via tz wrote:
I also believe that discriminating against countries like Angola and Niger is unacceptable. But the solution to that is the same as it always has been - to include full data for each ISO country, using best efforts for data that is not certain.
I addressed this issue toward the end of my recent email to Tom Lane <https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2021-September/030422.html>, which I sent about the same time you sent your email.
The *only* good faith move you can make right now is to revert the patch.
We disagree on this point. This morning I made a different good-faith move, by installing the "Revert May patch to zone.tab" patch into the development database. I suggested another potential good-faith move in that recent email to Tom Lane. I continue to think that it would be better to work together to find a common solution, than to insist on one unalterable position.
The approach you argue for arbitrarily discriminates too, saying that Germany is more important than Norway or Sweden.
The guideline is not arbitrary; it chooses the most-populous city, in this case Berlin. Although every guideline has a bias of some sort, it would be a quite a stretch to say that this particular guideline has racial, ethnic or national bias, which is the concern here.